she has a book or three to sell and with such salacious titles as Thirty One Days to Great Sex, The Good Girl’s Guide to Great Sex, and Honey I don’t have a Headache Tonight, you can see that this woman is selling a form of snake-oil and not without success as the second of these is at number 3,559 on [insert name of long south American river] .com. Getting God to give a plug for your book (blurb on dust-cover – ‘I could not put it down’ – God) is surely the ultimate in endorsements.

But this goes beyond mere clever marketing. Gregoire is clearly obsessed with sex, and deeply conflicted about it. When it comes to sex she and her readers have one foot on the gas and the other on the brake. You can see this from her books as well as the posts on her blog. There is a great deal of energy on using sex as a weapon, including when, how, and why to deny sex. The other side to this is all of the energy coming from the deep fear that they will overplay this card and as I described in Frigidity and power, lose their power. What if he watches porn, or even Game of Thrones while I’m denying sex? Then my V will lose its power over him! How do I overcome my own frigidity? If I’m frigid, my V has no power!

They’ve turned having sex into a Rube Goldberg contraption. But all of this works because the audience is already there. They already know how to use sex as a weapon, and they already have deep fears that by doing this they risk losing the very power they are trying to wield. They already sensed that misusing sex was making them frigid. Gregoire and her readers can rationalize to themselves that this is all about healthy Christian sexuality, despite the sea of red flags. Many husbands probably foolishly encourage their wives to read Gregoire, based on the promise of fixing their frigid wife.

Gregoire in her infinite wisdom of trusting all wise, all pure, all holy and always with the best motives of females rarely gives definites TO women only TO women about men. In other words, she does not shackle women within definite boundaries or fences- whether set out by scripture or not-only men. An example of this is you cannot pin her down to what is the correct amount of sex.

We know from Gregoire that sex should never happen one week per month for a woman’s cycle in which she should receive a week off, never during family vacations, never when he is watching things on TV that his wife finds offensive, never during a separation in which the woman has sought, and for a variety of other reasons. In fact, the only time she will give a number is on a single post which she has re-run a few times over the years- in which she lists the magic number a wife should put out a week at 2 (to be fair one time she ran it she put in 2 or 3). But since she has gone back to 2, let’s do some math.

2 times per week x 52 weeks=104. Subtract from that 24 for the 2 times per week for the week off every month and don’t forget to subtract the additional 2 for the family vacation week and we are down to 78. The average for any married couple in her target audience is “18-29 year olds have sex an average of 112 times per year, 30-39 year olds an average of 86 times per year.”

So in society where the divorce rate reaches close to 50%, where marriage is disdained and openly mocked about how little sex takes place within marriage the average secular marriage outdoes what this woman who is supposed to be teaching wives to respect and love their husbands by having sex with them. What she is shooting for does not even get to the average and yet she is upheld as christians shining star on sex.

Her ministry is not about teaching wives how to respect and love their husbands- including sex- but about teaching women to assume the headship of the marriage.

Her ministry is … about teaching women to assume the headship of the marriage.

It is just as much about teaching usurping wives how to placate their feelings of guilt calling their misappropriated headship submission. She gives cover to rebellious women and stirs up contempt against men in the name of a false Christ who exercises no authority, who requires no submission.

Matthew 18:7 “Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that person by whom the offense comes!

She’s been getting hammered by even Christian women over the TV porn issue, as an assault on the headship men are supposed to have in a Christian household. She has apparently deleted a great many posts from men saying the same thing, including mine. What she suggest Christian wives do would be considered spousal abuse if the husband were to do the same.

This balancing act results in the ridiculous situation of a wife who withholds sex for a week or more at a time, but reads books and magazines on how to make the sex hotter — because she realizes that, when she’s overplayed her hand and denied him too long, she’s going to need something special to win him back.

“”When it comes to sex she and her readers have one foot on the gas and another on the brake. You can see this from her books as well as the posts on her blog. There is a great deal of energy on using sex as a weapon, including when, how, and why to deny sex.””

I was glad that Opus found those books written by her.Sex to her is a “weapon”…..quite obvious to myself!…..after all,she is the “head of the household”…and hubby “tows the line”…or he gets NOTHING! What a lucky shlub he is?…..Ya right! A spineless “no balls” mangina!
I would be willing to bet that she voted for our illustrious “Lesbian Premier,Kathleen Wynn”.Do yourself a favour and research Ontario’s new “sexual education curriculum”….I would be willing to bet again that this femtard endorses it.They want to teach grade 3 & 4 students all about “gay sex,lesbian sex,oral sex etc”….just what 8 & 9 year olds need to know?……people in Ontario are furious about this.Not just Christians & Jews but, agnostics and atheists as well.Can you blame them.Again,Gregoire supports this.I know she does.This curriculum has the full support of the FemiNazi estalishment!……How pathetic is this?…..WOW! …………….As “Earl” pointed on on the last thread to myself specifically…”Toronto is a feminist utopia”………Yes it is!

“……..such salacious titles as Thirty One Days to Great Sex….”
More like generic titles. That still cracks me up, gee how original. If you need all this stuff and its just that hard for these women, then the woman just isn’t that attracted if it has to be so forced.
She did a cliché 50 shades article and at the end was a plug for that book (i.e. don’t buy 50 shades sex crap buy my sex crap).

“”This balancing act results in the ridiculous situation of a wife who withholds sex for a week or more at a time, but reads books and magazines on how to make the sex hotter — because she realizes that, when she’s overplayed her hand and denied him too long, she’s going to need something special to win him back.””

Great comment.Writes sex manuals?…but,cuts hubby off?…WTF? I would not put up with this BS.I would be moving to the couch,and be damn glad that I did.I would ignore her to my fullest potential.Leave at 6am…get home at 10pm. Leave on weekends(not telling where I am going).Lock the “home office” door,so she cannot bother me..etc..etc.Come down to the rec room and say “Hun..come upstairs to bed”……Me:…”GET LOST!…….Want to be a c***?…I will treat you like one! The only problem with this situation is that if there are kids involved!

If you haven’t read the books she has written, you can always leave comments on the reviews of people who have. You need to have an Amazon account to login. I don’t think she can delete those, though there are moderators who will delete vulgar comments etc.

Gregoire is no different to any other feminist. Is she really any different to the satanic skank, Jilly Cooper who said,

“Men are simple creatures. They can be trained with reward and punishment. Just like a dog”.

All Gregoire has done, from what I can see is put a Christian veneer on Cooper’s feminism. This makes her double damnable: not only is she promoting satanic philosophy, she is deceiving the Flock at the same time.
There are all sorts of stern warnings about the consequences of such actions, Ms Gregoire.

“So you can either treat it as a weapon and gain power…or treat it as a gift and gain love.”

I wish more women understood that this is how men seem to FEEL loved – when their wives treat sex as a gift with no motivation to use it as a weapon. Both win in the end and it grows the marriage by leaps and bounds.

My husband and I have not had the smoothest sex life so far. I am a recovering withholder. There have been times where we have been lying in bed, arguing about sex, and I thought to myself, “This is literally the stupidest thing we could fight about. We both like sex. We both want to do it. So why are we lying here fighting instead?”

@ lgrobins
You say, “If you need all this stuff and its just that hard for these women, then the woman just isn’t that attracted if it has to be so forced.”
I am very attracted to my husband, but in all honesty, there have been times where he has done something of an evening to annoy me and then I didn’t “feel” like sex, and yes, I let those feelings rule me.
So sometimes things DO need to be forced! I see it as feelings following actions, in the hope that one day it becomes more natural….

Gregoire is clearly obsessed with sex, and deeply conflicted about it.

This has been a pretty consistent theme throughout human history. But what I find the hardest to articulate about it is that people with control issues and those who hold leftist ideologies like feminism (kind of the same thing) are the ones project this onto others.

They accuse the entire society of being sex crazed while being almost the sole cause of it.

Great comment.Writes sex manuals?…but,cuts hubby off?…WTF? I would not put up with this BS.I would be moving to the couch,and be damn glad that I did.I would ignore her to my fullest potential.Leave at 6am…get home at 10pm. Leave on weekends(not telling where I am going).Lock the “home office” door,so she cannot bother me..etc..etc. Come down to the rec room and say “Hun…come upstairs to bed”……Me:…”GET LOST!…….Want to be a c***?…I will treat you like one! The only problem with this situation is that if there are kids involved!

Actually, kids or no kids, juvenile women need to be called out on their nonsense. If more men were this redpill, fewer women will continue to act like idiots.

I may have had an epiphany: denial of sex and sex manuals at the same time, huh? It doesn’t make sense for a woman to study up on improving her sex life if she’s not even meeting her minimal conjugal obligations. Unless… is it possible that the “Christian Sex Manuals” are sometimes just simple titillation to fill the gap left by a woman’s “not getting any”… because she’s withholding?

Reading “Cosmo” is bad, but “Cosmo for Christians” could be an “acceptable” substitute… it’s “Christian,” after all, right?

I do not get this. Are these woman just not C-ming? Or do they just not like sex ? Sex is a act of worship to God for his married kids. Top two reasons to marry, in order, is to glorify Yahweh and to get laid ( without sinning) This is crap. If I have sex I’m sinning, and these dumb bitches are sining by not have sex.
I think rather than wasting money on fancy dates and diners, “dating” should be treated as job interview process. Once prelim rounds are done, he will lay downs goals for our sex life: are 10- 12 times/weeks of sex that can makes babies, 5-8 husband center, 4-6 wife-center sex that means on good week you 26 time of love-making. Bad week is 21. He should tell her if your on period, or sick , this act is ok as substitute. Ei hj BJ
She can ( and should)
ask Questions about what acts he like,( if he does not have experience, then which act he want to try first). And he should have a yearly time of fasting build into the marriage. All other fasts she wants , he has to pray on her requests ( as The Lord will given confirmation to him if it’s needed.) he does not need to ask her if he can fast , but a heads up would be nice.
All of this written into their marriage covenant which is kept in home.

I’m trying to post a comment to the “Is this grounds for divorce/annulment?” question, but the forum is closed to new members at the moment – I assume the mod turns that off at night. Frankly, I can’t imagine why this is even a serious question – of course the answer is: NO.

What’s worse is the answer by Christy Beth, calling the husband an “abuser” who “shouldn’t be able to get away with that.” And what’s even worse than THAT is that Christy Beth has the title “Prayer Warrior” on her posts.

FWIW, she’s estranged from her own flesh-and-blood according to an older post of hers. Call me crazy, but I think a female heretic whose own daughter won’t talk to her or let her near her grandchildren is not exactly someone I would to turn to for advice about keeping one’s family intact and on the right track.

It would also seem women initiate divorce more than naught because they actually get headship in the home and go crazy from it…because it is something they aren’t supposed to get when they are married. Call it a real disconnect from reality.

“Don’t be surprised if those women run into the hands of ISIS, who, though in a perverted sense, are the only image of masculinity that they are left with.”
I reckon when push comes to shove, they’ll develop a passion for Mad Vlad, and his whack -’em-in-the-street-right-outside-the-Kremlin brand of machismo & socialismo (permanent state support is very important to these useless* and dependent bipeds).

*except for light bureaucratic routine tasks, and the production of a maximum of one potentially substandard replicant at an advanced age, thus doubling the amount of state munificence required to even keep them alive.

It would also seem women initiate divorce more than naught because they actually get headship in the home and go crazy from it…because it is something they aren’t supposed to get when they are married. Call it a real disconnect from reality.

Indeed. My ex once suggested to me that I needed to find a way to “walk ahead and aside of her at the same time”.

Avoid serious discussions when in bed. That’s an ambush. It’s also a mood-killer. Wait til some time after sex. He’ll be feeling happy and you can have productive talks as long as you don’t directly accuse him.

If your husband has done something that annoyed you, deal with your feelings about it on your own so that sex isn’t impacted. Do it early.

Cail Corishev @ February 28, 2015 at 3:24 pm:
“This balancing act results in the ridiculous situation of a wife who withholds sex for a week or more at a time, but reads books and magazines on how to make the sex hotter — because she realizes that, when she’s overplayed her hand and denied him too long, she’s going to need something special to win him back.”

Lyn87 @ 7:37 am:
“I may have had an epiphany: denial of sex and sex manuals at the same time, huh? It doesn’t make sense for a woman to study up on improving her sex life if she’s not even meeting her minimal conjugal obligations. Unless… is it possible that the “Christian Sex Manuals” are sometimes just simple titillation to fill the gap left by a woman’s “not getting any”… because she’s withholding?”

I, too, wondered about the constant barrage of sex topics on those grocery store rags but could never understand the appeal. Were women training themselves to please their men? Nice but observably not true. Were women simply that eager for sex? Their constant rejections (of Church Betas like me) proved that wrong. Why WERE they reading so much about sex without actually wanting to do it? It was one of my personal “flaws in the Matrix”.

Earl: “Have them start reading the Bible when they can. That’s all the truth a person will ever need.”

The Bible alone is hard to understand. As the Ethiopian eunuch said to Philip, “How can I [understand Scripture], unless someone guides me?” (Acts 8:30-31)

One needs a good “study Bible,” one with much explanatory commentary. And it must be a good one, with sound doctrine.

As a Catholic, I recommend the Navarre Bible, with commentary compiled by the Theology Dept of the University of Navarre. Commentary not from any one man, but drawn from 2,000 years of Church history; from its Saints, Popes, Church councils, and theologians.

I’ve seen them suspend registrations when they get tons of spammers in. (The administrator who runs CAF isn’t competent, as he’s almost completely unable to prevent spam registrations, even with outside help and plenty of addons/software.)

If registrations aren’t re-enabled in the next day or two, I can just give you the details of a spare account of mine.

I’ve seen them suspend registrations when they get tons of spammers in. (The administrator who runs CAF isn’t competent, as he’s almost completely unable to prevent spam registrations, even with outside help and plenty of addons/software.)

If registrations aren’t re-enabled in the next day or two, I can just give you the details of a spare account of mine.

They like sex just fine. They have lost attraction to their husbands, primarily because he acquiesced to her demands and gave her headship of the home due to her magic vagina. Now she feels like it is being “raped” if she has to give up that magic hoo hoo to the unworthy man that she browbeat, manipulated and ultimately defeated.

I truly believe they get more pleasure out of torturing their husbands and seeing his hurt and disappointment and frustration (because it validates them) than they get out of the sexual act itself. That is the REAL cycle of abuse.

I’m trying to post a comment to the “Is this grounds for divorce/annulment?” question, but the forum is closed to new members at the moment – I assume the mod turns that off at night. Frankly, I can’t imagine why this is even a serious question – of course the answer is: NO.

Still no movement on creating an account. Since you have a “spare” account, would you just post this for me (assuming you don’t disagree with it, of course: I wouldn’t expect you to post something you can’t endorse).
————————————-

The short answer is NO: absolutely not. But bear with me through the “tough love” part and read to the end – there’s hope.

First, let’s talk about some hard truths, because nothing gets better if we don’t own up to our own mistakes. You’ve “been with” this guy for 10 years, moved to Spain to be with him six years ago, and got married four years ago… you say you “didn’t get along” all that time.

Something doesn’t add up. You don’t move to another continent to be with someone you don’t get along with unless you’re one of those women attracted to aloof “bad boys” due to lack of maturity on your part (or you already had a child together before you got married). You also don’t say how old your children are, but given that you have been following this “bad boy” around for a decade, and he makes no effort to live as a follower of Christ, I have to assume that you were fornicating before you got married. I’ll even go out on a limb and guess that an unwed pregnancy MAY be the reason you married a man who does not share your faith. If any of that is correct, you were not practicing Catholicism either (in any meaningful sense), and you knew what you were getting into but chose to do it anyway – despite all the red flags.

BUT EVEN IF NONE OF THAT IS TRUE, the answer is still NO, because you made life-long vows before God and man (to a man you had already “been with” for six years, no less – it’s not like you have any excuse for not foreseeing this), and he has not done anything that would permit you to initiate a separation, much less a divorce or annulment. It certainly does not justify separating him from his children – that’s not your call to make. If he was abusing you and you had to get away for your physical safety, that’s one thing (still not grounds for divorce or annulment, but grounds for physical separation until it is resolved). But that’s not the case or you would have said so. You are not being “abused” (perhaps the most overused word in the English language) – you are looking for a way to get out of submitting to a husband you no longer wish to submit to because you’re not getting your way, even if it means breaking your vows and turning his/your children into “divorce-orphans.” It is his job to lead the family – it is your job to submit to his leadership. He is answerable to God, not to you (Ephesians 5:22-24). You certainly may express your opinions and preferences until he decides, but when you said “I do” in Christian matrimony, you put yourself under his headship: “for better or worse, ‘til death do you part.”
Frankly, it sounds like BOTH of you have a long history of choosing poorly, but choosing poorly isn’t a “Get-Out-of-My-Sacred-Vows-Before-God-Free” card. You violated 2 Corinthians 6:14 (“Do not harness yourselves in an uneven team with unbelievers…”) when you married him and started making babies, so the fault is every bit as much yours as it is his. But your marriage is real, and no man or tribunal of men can retroactively make it “un-real” in God’s eyes.

That was the “tough love” part. Now comes the part where there’s hope:

Fortunately, scripture gives instructions for these EXACT kinds of situations: Peter 3:1-2 says, “In the same way, you wives should be obedient to your husbands. Then if there are some husbands who do not believe the Word, they may find themselves won over, without a word spoken, by the way their wives behave, when they see the reverence and purity of your way of life.”
There it is – right there in the Bible in an epistle penned by Peter himself: Be a submissive wife and, by your behavior (not by nagging or arguing – it says “without a word”), you may win over your unbelieving husband.

I have a sad bit of news to relate. It seems my nephew has unilaterally decided that he no longer wishes to be married to his wife of about three years, and recently told her that he no longer loves her and wants out. He’s willing to give her everything, presumably to facilitate a rapid conclusion… he just wants to pull the ejection lever. (No kids are involved.)

He’s being very closed-mouthed about it, but the consensus is that he has somebody else waiting in the wings… I imagine we’ll find out soon enough. His father (my brother) has given him an earful or two already, but his mind seems made up. One thing I know: if he has another wedding, none of us will attend… or even acknowledge it except to condemn it.

Perhaps all teen boys should be immersed in red-pill truths in high school. Kinda like sex-ed.

Just teach them the Bible, and begin early. High school is probably a little late. The good book is brimming with undiluted redpill truths, authored by Alpha Himself. At the same time, feed the girls with regular doses of Bible-based redpill truths, so they embrace their duties early on, and don’t get their heads confused with feminist propaganda.

Timothy’s parents did this, and Timothy had no choice but to embrace those truths:

You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2 Timothy 3:14, 15.

I have a sad bit of news to relate. It seems my nephew has unilaterally decided that he no longer wishes to be married to his wife of about three years, and recently told her that he no longer loves her and wants out. He’s willing to give her everything, presumably to facilitate a rapid conclusion… he just wants to pull the ejection lever. (No kids are involved.)

If no kids are involved, then perhaps it’s best that this happen now, rather than later, when there are little ones to ruin.

Now let me jam my face into the hat and tell you the future…

Of course the side-ho that nephew has been banging will (miracle of miracles) just happen to appear shortly after the divorce. Between the divorce and year two, you’ll hear all manner of nasty things about nephews ex-wife… What a raging bitch she was, blah blah. This will be either wildly exaggerated or total bullshit (people have to lie when they behave badly, if only to preserve their own ego). Don’t bother arguing with him about this. Just sit quietly while laughing inside until you get a chance to change the subject. Meanwhile, side-ho turned wife no. 2 will be ingratiating herself into the female side of your family.

Some time between year four and year ten, side-ho turned wife no. 2 will get tired of her conquest and summon his ass to divorce court. Of course, she’s been cucking him for years. Leopards and spots and all. He’ll pretend to be the poor victim (despite doing the same thing himself to someone else). Feel free to not feel any sympathy.

After the second divorce, nephew will hopefully just embrace the single life, but is more likely to have a long series of four-month relationships with unsavory women until he reaches retirement age.

Avoid serious discussions when in bed. That’s an ambush. It’s also a mood-killer. Wait til some time after sex. He’ll be feeling happy and you can have productive talks as long as you don’t directly accuse him.

If your husband has done something that annoyed you, deal with your feelings about it on your own so that sex isn’t impacted. Do it early.”

It’s actually my husband who starts the discussion in bed, as he won’t initiate sex if he gets a “vibe” that I’m not into it. I’m the one who would prefer to just get into it, and talk later.
But your advice about dealing with my feelings early is helpful. I think this would solve a lot of issues before they become problems.

I suspect you’re about spot-on. My niece-in-law really is a nice girl, and my nephew isn’t saying anything bad about her – just that he’s no longer in love. We don’t know the full story, but he’s not alleging any bad conduct on her part, and his willingness to basically give her everything (even their dog) without even a quibble suggests that he’s in a hurry to move on… which strongly suggests another woman.

Here’s a detail I didn’t mention before: his wife’s family is loaded… far more wealthy than any of us. My nephew makes pretty good money, but her parents are lavish spenders, and he has been the beneficiary of large amounts of their largesse. So not only is he walking away from a nice girl, he’s leaving a ton of money on the table as well. That also strongly suggests a “fall-back” plan.

I have little doubt that he will receive support from the female side of his family (my ex-SIL was quite the whore – and my brother made a very big mistake marrying her – and my niece takes after her mother). These are not the kind of people who will condemn him for anything as “trivial” as what he’s apparently doing.

But I won’t hear anything bad about the soon-to-be-ex-wife from him, because 1) we’re not close and 2) he knows better than to try that with me – I’ll tell him off and he knows it. So unless she’s been banging the mailman (which is highly unlikely), this is all on him. He’s seen this side of the family disown his kid sister for being a slut, so he has to know he’s going to get the same treatment: persona non grata unless he gets right. He already drifted away from the church – now he is knowingly walking away from his wife, his vows, and most of his blood relatives.

Boxer
That is pretty shameful for dude walking out on a commitment he made. Always honor the wife even you think you need side pussy. Pass on the pussy and if had to have it, it is weak ass chicken shit to dump a wife for side pussy. That’s one of those guys that make laws of misandry a good thing.

It’s my nephew, not Boxer’s. And I’m disgusted by his conduct. He grew up in a Christian home, and graduated from the Christian school where I was one of his teachers. He saw the absolute wreck his mother made of her life (she cuckolded my brother for another guy, then married him and cuckolded him with another guy, then she married him and cuckolded him too, and there were plenty of others in between). My brother had full custody once the smoke cleared from the custody trial. She’s now a washed-up three-time loser who looks like an extra from “The Walking Dead.” No kidding, the last time I saw her she looked like a corpse. I almost didn’t recognize her – and that was 10 years ago and she’s younger than I am.

But he’s not fighting her for their possessions – just giving it all to her to make it/her go away. They both work at good-paying jobs (she’s a nurse and can work anywhere – and her parents are loaded, like I mentioned), and since she’s getting all the assets, no judge would do to him anything more than what he’s doing to himself. He’ll walk away with nothing – not even his family, since he’s going to be disowned by most of his relatives unless there’s a lot more to this than he’s admitted so far.

I’ll reiterate that I don’t have all the details, but it seems pretty clear-cut from what we do know. I feel bad for her, my brother, and my parents. I don’t feel bad for him at all.

“My niece-in-law really is a nice girl, and my nephew isn’t saying anything bad about her – just that he’s no longer in love. We don’t know the full story, but he’s not alleging any bad conduct on her part, and his willingness to basically give her everything (even their dog) without even a quibble suggests that he’s in a hurry to move on… which strongly suggests another woman.”

Except for “giving up everything”, he sounds a lot like the women often criticized ’round these parts.

“He’s seen this side of the family disown his kid sister for being a slut, so he has to know he’s going to get the same treatment: persona non grata unless he gets right. He already drifted away from the church – now he is knowingly walking away from his wife, his vows, and most of his blood relatives.”

You sure are a judgmental lot. Why can’t you be more open-minded? Can’t you see that they’re in lurrrrrrrrrrrve?

“They already know how to use sex as a weapon, and they already have deep fears that by doing this they risk losing the very power they are trying to wield.”

Female sexuality in our culture is all about power, the power to manipulate men. Advertisers use it to sell every imaginable product. Media uses it everywhere from entertainment to news. There’s the $13 billion porn industry. This encourages the women who’ve actually got it to use it, even just the allure of sex for free drinks, meals, employment opportunities, sky is the limit. Wives, secular and churchian, use sex to manipulate husbands. Prostitution and its variations are effective until the chumps finally wake up and now, more and more, so many are. This is where these whores are losing the power they’re trying to wield.

For me, all of this is one hell of an icy-cold pale of water. Sexual desire for women? Yeah, I got that but I’ve never been with a prostitute, I’m certainly not going to marry one. What women like Gregoire and all those fools like her, including some pastors in pulpits, are teaching Christian men is that marriage is typically nothing more than a slightly more sophisticated form of prostitution. Wives will trade you sex if you conform/obey them? What self respecting man wants that if he figures out the game beforehand?

Earl – “So you can either treat it as a weapon and gain power…or treat it as a gift and gain love.”

Until such women run into men who refuse to me manipulated and end up with neither power nor love.

I’m basing my little prediction, aside from my inbred Mormon genetic predisposition to prophecies, on the life story of several extended family relatives I know. Men in Mormonism frivorce decent wives much more often than they should. I suspect its a dysfunctional historical artifact from the polygamy days — we may just be that much more open to wandering.

That is pretty shameful for dude walking out on a commitment he made. Always honor the wife even you think you need side pussy. Pass on the pussy and if had to have it, it is weak ass chicken shit to dump a wife for side pussy. That’s one of those guys that make laws of misandry a good thing.

Wise words.

I instinctively want to say it’s a feminine mode of being, this flighty inability to keep the commitments one makes, but I don’t want to insult women (esp. with women on this board who don’t act this way). I guess it’d be more accurate to call these people infantile. A man ought not enter into an arrangement he knows he won’t be able to keep.

He’s seen this side of the family disown his kid sister for being a slut, so he has to know he’s going to get the same treatment: persona non grata unless he gets right. He already drifted away from the church – now he is knowingly walking away from his wife, his vows, and most of his blood relatives.

Your family has a much healthier view of monogamy than mine does. We sorta pretend to like these scounderels, and they make a habit of taking advantage of the rest of us. It’s part of the reason I don’t go to many family events any more. I’m actually treated worse (as a dude that’s not interested in religion or marriage) than the older male frivorcers, or, for that matter, the younger girl skank-ho single moms. Whenever I do hit the family reunions, I get hit up for money every time, by people who I wouldn’t otherwise associate with.

A sensible shunning policy (at least until demonstrable cleanup has been done in the individual’s life) is a beautiful thing. Be grateful for it.

Looks like you got a reply from Xantippe – I’ll be happy to post your reply.

Destroyer of marriages, and bastardizer of children, Xantippe, has gone to “work”. Study her tactics well, boys. She’s a master of subtlety, and probably the best feminist rhetorician I’ve seen on the internet.

I just got home and looked at Xantippe’s reply. It was a lot more mild than I would have expected. I figured she’s go all-out nuts and start calling me a misogynist, neck-beard, bitter, loser who beats his wife. I’m not going to get into a tit-for-tat discussion with her. She’s not my audience. Let her argue against scripture and the teachings of her own church if she wants to. I do not expect to respond again. Please post what’s between the lines as a response to one of Xantippe’s replies, though. That way I indirectly acknowledge that I read what she wrote and chose to “go around” her and address the OP directly.

– Thanks for posting this for me.
___________________________

CatholicTina,

Some of the scripture I quoted was specifically addressed to women with unbelieving husbands… women who converted to Christianity after they were married in pagan ceremonies. In 2000 years no-one has disputed whether those passages of scripture applied to women not married in churches. In fact it was to such women that the scripture is addressed, so the validity of your marriage does not depend on whether it took place in a church or not. It doesn’t even matter whether you specifically took a vow to obey: wifely submission is found in scripture and church tradition. You ARE married, and both the Bible and 20 centuries of the traditions of the church are very clear about what that means.

Read 1st Peter 3:1 and Ephesians 5:22-24. it’s as plain as day. You can choose God’s way or man’s way.

“Consider Sweden, a place where the Feminists admit they got EVERYTHING they asked for. The result; they utterly despise their men for it.”
—
And the Swedes(men) have responded, by importing more Thai wives than any other E.U. country.

Thanks MarcusD. Like I wrote above: I do not intend to post again to that thread. Anyone reading – including the OP if she’s still monitoring the thread – can see the argument I laid out and its basis in scripture (as well as a h/t to tradition).

Anything Xantippe or anyone else says to the contrary is just arguing against that. Let’s face it, neither Peter nor Paul questioned the validity of the marriages of the women they were addressing. The idea that the legitimacy of the OP’s marriage (four years and two children later) could be called into question is absurd.

Trying to find a way to annul that is like a blind man in a dark room searching for a black cat… that isn’t there.

Of course the side-ho that nephew has been banging will (miracle of miracles) just happen to appear shortly after the divorce. Between the divorce and year two, you’ll hear all manner of nasty things about nephews ex-wife… What a raging bitch she was, blah blah. This will be either wildly exaggerated or total bullshit (people have to lie when they behave badly, if only to preserve their own ego).

From my observations often it’s the wife who initiates the divorce and exaggerates the sins of her ex husband, but suffice to say it’s the song of the perpetrator desperately wanting to be seen as an ‘innocent party’. [That’s christianese for eligible to remarry.]

Don’t bother arguing with him about this. Just sit quietly while laughing inside until you get a chance to change the subject. Meanwhile, side-ho turned wife no. 2 will be ingratiating herself into the female side of your family.

Some time between year four and year ten, side-ho turned wife no. 2 will get tired of her conquest and summon his ass to divorce court. Of course, she’s been cucking him for years. Leopards and spots and all. He’ll pretend to be the poor victim (despite doing the same thing himself to someone else). Feel free to not feel any sympathy.

After the second divorce, nephew will hopefully just embrace the single life, but is more likely to have a long series of four-month relationships with unsavory women until he reaches retirement age.

I’m a prophet, like Brigham Young himself.

Boxer

You wear the hat well.
I’m not saying that Brigham Young was a prophet but your guesstimation of the future is so close to what I’ve seen in so many lives… Its so sad to see the children of these marriages.

I feel frustrated at your post, but not for the same reasons.
Welcome to parenthood. Seriously.
Did you not think about any of this before you married?
Did they not mention to you in Pre-Cana that there would big adjustments to your life when your wife came with toddlers in tow?
Can you imagine her frustration at being trapped in the house all week with 2 (presumably) clingy children?
I wonder if you have any notion about what your wife’s life must be like.
I see a lot of “I’s” in your post.
Her needs are family needs. Until she gets a license or as Xan says, you relocate to a place where things are more accessible for her (which believe me, she surely would love) her life is pretty miserable from a SAHM standpoint. Most stay at home mothers are fairly independent. It sounds as though she must look to you for everything. How do you think that makes her feel? Ask her how SHE feels. Maybe go talk to the priest, get some counseling and investigate real doable solutions. What’s going to happen when she becomes pregnant?
This is something you both must work on immediately. It’s not even prudent to have her home alone with no options for interaction with the outside world.
I’ll bet she’s really frustrated. Think about it.
I work 60 hours a week ( only 40 paid) and take care of lots of things, commute 30 miles to church, and am pretty much available to the parishioners 24-7.
It’s just what most people do, in this day and age.
It gets more problematic as the children grow up and participate in LIFE, much less piano lessons, sports, drama club, dance, academic societies, etc. Wait until you encounter the ubiquitous “Science Fair”.
Take some vitamins and teach her to drive.
Sorry. You caught me in the middle of working a 12 hour day.
Many of us escape via the internet, eh?
But that’ show I feel.

That is a comment of shame given to Capt Save a hoe in one of Marcus’ linked threads. I notice that such person works 60 hours a week, only gets paid for 40, so is a slave for 20 hours per week.. and is also available 24/7 for parishioners.. How does one work 60 hours a week and still be available 24/7? Something does not compute..

Destroyer of marriages, and bastardizer of children, Xantippe, has gone to “work”. Study her tactics well, boys. She’s a master of subtlety, and probably the best feminist rhetorician I’ve seen on the internet.

Indeed, she is very skilled at peddling feminism in Catholic vestments.

Lgrobins and bluepillprofessor have it pretty much correct. The reason Gregoire and other Christian “ministers”, advice/relationship bloggers, and authors write so much about sex is because their audience (Christian/churchian women) is supremely conflicted about sex.

The reason Christian-churchian women are so conflicted about sex is because almost all of them are not attracted to their husbands. More to the point, they are less attracted to their husbands than the men these women used to sleep with before they got married.

Consider the typical Christian woman. 9 out of 10 of them have had premarital sex. Most have had one or two Serious Boyfriends. A few even had a Fiancee. Of course, she had sex with them. Most have had two or three Mistakes in there too. (“Mistake”= hawt guy she just HAD to have sex with, or hawt guy she tried to use rapid sex on to maneuver into a relationship.) She was much more attracted to those men to whom she gave the best of her youth and beauty. She obviously hoped that things would work out with at least one of those men in her youth, but it didn’t for whatever reason.

So now she is ‘stuck’ with the man who eventually did offer her marriage, the man with whom the timing and the logistics eventually worked out. She was some measure of desperate. She subconsciously knew time was running out. She was able to use her sexual charms to attract this more-than-a-little thirsty guy. Easy enough.

And yeah, the sex is OK, though it doesn’t ring her bell like the other guys did. But it’s good enough, she guesses, and it’s OK, and she’s willing to sex the guy because he has other things she wants (a secure job, willingness to offer commitment). Yeah, OK, I guess we can get married. Sure. Great. There’s just something about him that’s not quite right, but she hopes they can work through it. Or she knows she just isn’t all that into him sexually, but she hopes that that will just not be all that important as she gets older. After all, he has his work, and she will soon get pregnant and have a kid, and they get along pretty well, and hopefully he won’t notice…..

But it IS important. And things do worsen between them. And it mostly plays out like this: She isn’t all that attracted to him. She isn’t hot for sex with him. She doesn’t really want to have sex with him. He tries to make things better by giving her whatever she wants. That only worsens things. She pushes him away; he tries to get closer by either (1) asking her what she wants and giving it to her; or (2) worse, by trying to figure out what she wants.

She can’t articulate that she isn’t attracted to him and doesn’t want to have sex with him. No, that can’t be it. She married him, she reasons; she MUST be attracted to him. She wouldn’t marry a man she wasn’t attracted to. She wouldn’t marry a man just because he had a job or because he was willing to marry her. That would make her little better than a prostitute, trading sex for commitment; or sex for financial security.

More importantly, admitting the truth would also mean that she is a miserable failure. She has abjectly failed at the one thing she has always wanted – a happy marriage and a “fulfilled” life.

So, it cannot be that she’s not attracted to him. It cannot be that she has failed. It must be HIS fault. It’s HIS fault that the marriage isn’t going well. If they don’t have a good sex life, it’s because HE is doing something wrong.

If she is not attracted to him, it is because HE has done something wrong. It is because HE is pushing too hard (he’s not, it’s that ANY requests for sex are “too much”).

It’s because HE wants sex “all the time” (“all the time” defined as “once or twice a week”). It’s because HE wants her to do ‘nasty’ things (never mind that years ago, she absolutely delighted in doing those ‘nasty’ things with Harley McBadboy and then with Frank Fratboy when she was engaged to him).

It’s because HE isn’t doing enough around the house to free her up for sex (i.e. he needs to do more chores and “help out around here”). It’s because HE needs to lose weight, dress better, look nicer. It’s because HE doesn’t do enough “romantic” things for her (i.e. rub her feet, buy her flowers “just because”; take her out to her favorite place once a week, etc.).

And so, this is why we get all the direction from Gregoire and her ilk that women are sexual “slow cookers” – they need a full day to “rev up” sexually (ignoring the mountains of evidence showing that women are willing to go from “hi” to sex within hours for the right guy). They need “romance” (bubble baths, foot rubs, candlelight dinners). They need long, slow, sweet, soft “lovemaking” (Never mind that if a woman is turned on she wants her man to do her HARD). They need “choreplay”.

Gregoire actually said something like (paraphrasing) “We want love. We aren’t visual. We don’t look at our husbands after they’ve thrown their dirty shirts in the laundry and think ‘hubba hubba’.”

(Uh, yeah, but pre-marriage, most of them looked at Alpha McGorgeous with his shirt off in their dorm rooms and didn’t say anything before shedding clothes and prior moral convictions).

So this is the primary problem here. Most women are married to men to whom they are not as attracted as the men they used to sleep with. This is the crux of the problem in most marriages. And I think the only way to get past it is for married men to get backbones, and to tell their wives that the status quo won’t continue a moment longer. “You will either live up to your end of the bargain, or this is done. You will either carry your weight in this marriage and fulfill your obligations to me, or you will be no longer married to me. No sex, no marriage.” And then follow through on it. That will no doubt end some marriages. But it could improve others.

Some of the husbands I know, where their wives have used sex as a weapon, don’t bother trying to have sex with their wives. They say they have started doing other things like building picnic tables and doing other things besides wasting their time on a wife that play dangerous games.

As for the men in these marriages: Most of them are spineless pussies in their relationships and marriages. But I don’t really blame them, because they’ve been specifically trained and taught to act this way toward women. Paraphrasing C.S. Lewis: we raise men to be sunken chested wimps and whiners; and then wonder why that’s what they are when they grow to adulthood.

We wonder why they cannot or will not stand up for themselves, when they were raised and trained not to.

We wonder why these men put up with rivers upon oceans of shit from their wives. It is because they were specifically told and trained (and some saw with their own eyes) that that’s what being a husband is. They were specifically trained to give their wives whatever they wanted; trained to fold up like a cheap tent at the first sign of challenge and shit testing from a wife. They were trained that anything they want sexually is “rape” and “male sexual entitlement”. They were taught to give give give give give, and that they aren’t to expect to receive anything back in marriage. They were taught that it’s a “privilege” to take on so much responsibility and receive nothing for it; no rewards and no incentives.

No, he’s not gay. He takes after his father (my brother) when he was younger. My brother always had a natural easygoingness about himself that attracted girls. I guess one might call that a species of “natural game,” although he never came across as a natural leader of men – there’s no “alpha dog” vibe there.

His son, my nephew, got it too. Girls just seem to like him, and he’s always liked them back. Beyond that point anything I would say would be pure speculation, but I imagine his natural charm resulted in an opportunity and his lack of honor led him into the abyss.

As for male homosexuality, it’s exceedingly common in Muslim countries for men to bugger each other and boys (and goats, and donkeys…). Maybe omnisexual would be a better description of the average Muslim male, but they still breed with women and marry them. They’re even fairly patriarchal (externally) as far as family structure – although Muslim women generally rule within the walls. But we’re here, not there. Among men in the Western world it’s fairly uncommon for a man to actually prefer men to women as bed partners, despite what the Gay Lobby would like us to believe.

“As for male homosexuality, it’s exceedingly common in Muslim countries for men to bugger each other and boys (and goats, and donkeys…). Maybe omnisexual would be a better description of the average Muslim male, but they still breed with women and marry them.”

The male commenters on this blog who frequently romanticize Muslim culture as some kind of patriarchal paradise are probably ignorant of this aspect of it. Here’s a bit of education for them.

“In Baghram, British Marines returning from an operation deep in the Afghan
mountains spoke last night of an alarming new threat—being propositioned by
swarms of gay local farmers. An Arbroath Marine, James Fletcher, said: ‘They
were more terrifying than the al-Qaeda. One bloke who had painted toenails was
offering to paint ours. They go about hand in hand, mincing around the village.’
While the Marines failed to find any al-Qaeda during the seven-day Operation
Condor, they were propositioned by dozens of men in villages the troops were
ordered to search.

Another interviewee in the article, a Marine in his 20’s, stated, ‘It was hell… Every village we
went into we got a group of men wearing make-up coming up, stroking our hair and cheeks and
making kissing noises’.”

@Oscar… they grow up their own homosexual culture. They routinely take young boys (very young – it’s so horrible), dress them up as little girls, put makeup on their and jewelry, make them dance on a table in front of a bunch of horny muslim men (the fuckers), and then make bets or buy them and take them home to have sex with them.

You might be onto something. I think Vox’s “alphabet” system is a lot more useful than the alpha/beta shorthand dichotomy most guys use (although it has utility as well). It’s not perfect, by any means – no system of categorization that has only a handful of types to describe half the world’s population is going to catch the subtleties of the human condition.

I have exhibited some of the characteristics of nearly every category at one time or another, and different characteristics were more prominent in different times and circumstances. After careful study of Vox’s system (more than once), I think I grew into someone who is “probably somewhat more Sigma than any of the others, usually” – although that was not always true. I could make the case that my nephew is also in the Sigma category as well, although we are not very much alike. Like I said, the categories have to cover a lot of ground.

Seems very similar to ancient Greece, really and, to a lesser extent, Rome as well. What cleaned that up was the cultural influence of Judeo-Christianity, and its very hostile attitude towards homosexuality, I think, in a non-compromising way (unlike the various tacit compromises that Islam seems to have made with homosexuality). Of course, in Greece and Rome, no-one considered themselves “homosexual” in terms of “orientation” — almost all of them had wives and children and had sex with their wives. They also, however, had sex with pubescent boys (similar to as described above), and then grew up to have sex with pubescent boys as adults. It was just an accepted part of sexuality — sex with women was for children, sex with boys was for pleasure (and “freer”). It seems that this is not that uncommon culturally, but, again, it’s very different from our current notions of a fixed “homosexual orientation” — that wasn’t what was going on in Greece and Rome.

I think the whole concept of “s-xuality” is a relatively new term. I don’t even think that word exists in the Bible. Sodomy is there, but not s-xuality.

Your above post pretty much describes why I think the whole concept of “s-xuality” is just nonsense. Everything from the waist down is mechanical. The ancient Greeks, Romans, and “Pastuns” understood this even if we are too sophisticated today to concur. I am not in anyway championing their barbaric behavior NOR am I defending the act of men to only have s-x with other men. I am only stating that from the belly down, everything is machinery, NOT love, romance, passion, desire, etc. Those are all in your head, your heart, your mind, and your soul.

Everything from the waist down is mechanical. . . . I am only stating that from the belly down, everything is machinery, NOT love, romance, passion, desire, etc. Those are all in your head, your heart, your mind, and your soul.

I’m not sure what you mean by “mechanical.” The partition between the physiological and the psychological is rather artificial, an academic distinction you could say. Arousal starts in the mind (“love, romance, passion, desire, etc.”), produces the physiological response, and is further stimulated by feedback from the body, so it’s really tough to separate the two. One’s psychological state is definitely going to influence what is happening waist down. In other words, everything from the waist down is not happening independently. When you say “mechanical” this implies independence (automation) to me, but I could be wrong.

I agree that “love, romance, passion, desire, etc.” originate in the head/heart/mind/soul, not the loins.

Pardon me for being rude but I am doing this to explain. 4 men hold you down against your will while a 5th man grabs your “member” and stimulates you (against your will) until you ejaculate. You want to kill these 5 guys, but you did have an org-sm and it felt good. There is no love, romance, passion, desire, etc there, just your member (in your loins) which is “machinery” operating “mechanically.” You were violated but there was nothing you could do to prevent your machinery from operating normally. This is the number one reason why rape counselors have such a hard time couseling true rape victims to get past their self-hatred because the victim might have an actual org-sm while she was violated (tricking her mind into thinking she liked it.)

It is with this concept as to why I do NOT believe in the concept of s-xuality. I think that is all just nonsense. Below the waist, everything is mechanical. We can’t BS our way out of that reality.

Sorry to cuss Dalrock! Really hate what is done in Islam… and there are things even worse than their penchant for pedophilia.

Everything below the waist for men maybe be mechanical, however, it is also biological and neurochemical… the hormones from orgasm and the chemicals released linked to the reward system of the brain don’t stop just because a child (or an adult) are being raped. Many homosexual men were raped or molested when young – many probably also weren’t, but you can’t deny that there is a strong biological & neurochemical response to things like that, especially if they are child prostitutes where it happens repeatedly.

“they grow up their own homosexual culture. They routinely take young boys (very young – it’s so horrible), dress them up as little girls, put makeup on their and jewelry, make them dance on a table in front of a bunch of horny muslim men (the fuckers), and then make bets or buy them and take them home to have sex with them.”

I’ve done two combat tours in Afghanistan and one in Iraq. I’m familiar with bacha bazi.

“They ruin these boys forever after that.”

And often turn them into suicide bombers. A DIA study into captured suicide bombers discovered that many of them either were raped as children, or more recently, and felt the only way to regain their wasta was to kill and die for Allah.

Your example proves the opposite of what you think it proves. Any normal man would feel violated if he suffered that experience, because everything below the waste is inseparable from his mind and spirit – the very core of him.

You can’t separate a thing from its designer’s intent for it. That is why abuse is when a thing is used in a way that is contrary to the designer’s intent. In this case, the designer is God. When people ignore that fact, they fall into all kinds of perversion.

@Oscar – thanks for the validation on that…. seriously my parents were racist, so it’s hard for me to separate that part of myself when viewing arabs/muslims. I had a beautiful jeweled bag that came form Israel and had “Israel” jeweled on it – my mother wouldn’t let me go outside with it – it had to stay inside of the house because they were so afraid of muslim men seeing me wearing it. I believe I’ve overcome it somewhat – I don’t view Muslim women in a sort of hatred way, and not all Muslim men are like that.

But how do you know? Look at the Muslim rape gangs happening in Europe to young girls… where they have been sexually destroying and torturing them for decades now. It’s primarily Muslim men. The reports coming out are said to be so horrifying and soul-shattering that the people (men and women) involved inthe investigation are having to go to counseling just to deal with the horrific things they are hearing. Girls having the most barbaric sexual acts done to them – having their tongues nailed to tables.

And the worst part? They’ve gotten away with it because society wants to be politically correct.

Although we have to remember that God loves all of mankind, and that includes Muslims, we do not have to shy away from calling Islam what it is: a virulent cancer on the world. And the sooner people figure that out the better off we’ll all be.

Islam has exactly ZERO redeeming qualities. Even the “nice” sections of the Qur’an are lies told a cover for the “real” message. That’s not just me speaking, either: abrogation is a core doctrine of Islam, and the point of abrogation is that whatever was said first (the “peaceful” verses of the earlier “Mecca” period) is superseded by whatever came later (the violent verses of the later “Medina” period). Islamic school curricula, especially what is taught in the West and to new converts, is therefore usually taught chronologically. In other words, they teach “peace” until the convert is thoroughly invested in Islam, then they get to the “radical” teachings that came later… specifically the current commandments about armed jihad. It is deceptive by design.

I’m not a fan of medieval popes, but the Crusades might have been one of their better ideas. And let’s not forget that the Balkans lived under the shadow of the Muslim crescent for a very long time. It’s no accident that Vlad Drăculea – the real-life person (and all-around sociopath) who served as the model for Bram Stoker’s novel Dracula, is still venerated as a hero by many… because he relentlessly and mercilessly fought against Muslim incursions into Europe.

As bad as he was (and he could be VERY bad)… they had good cause to know that Islam is worse.

Note that Romans states that God gives a people who reject Him over to homosexuality, so that would fit the Muslim model, and the atheist one for that matter. It is the rejection of Him that comes first, something many miss today.

@Lyn87
Fun fact, Vlad Drăculea and his brother were given over to the Ottoman empire as hostages as young boys by their father the Dragul (sp), after which his brother converted to Islam and became one of their generals. Romania was a total mess at the time and Vlad’s brutal tactics were precisely necessary against an existential threat. He wouldn’t have gained power 3 times if no one appreciated what he did…

On a general note (especially to DragonFly girl), the dangerous Muslims aren’t born and bred, they are the converts. All the people who I have known personally that ended up highly radicalized or picked up for being in Al-Qaeda etc… converts. The distinction is probably similar to the Jewish convert who becomes haredi, and the native born who is orthodox (relatively practicing) or reformed.

Oddly enough, I know quite a lot of Iraqi, Turkish, and Irani men, and all of them could be shoved into the moderate/liberal camp. But by that I mean, they prefer chaste wives, only fornicate with white/European women, and busy themselves with their jobs/families/friends rather than scripture. The more orthodox/conservative are distinguished by arranged marriages and no physical contact with non-related females, but overall these men are indistinguishable from anyone else other than by their skin color (and not even that if we are talking Turkish). However, only this sort of Muslim is safe from radicalism *as they have other things to look forward to than blowing themselves up.* Don’t look to unemployed “youths” or “reverts” (i.e. converts) for any sense.

Also @girlwithadragonflytattoo it’s important to remember which *types* of Muslims are wandering around in rape gangs. Pakistanis. They culturally view any women not also Muslim as no better than a prostitute. So they targeted all vulnerable females equally, Sikh, Hindu, Christian, but generally speaking native Britons were less well guarded. Probably why not much is heard about roving rape gangs of Albanians (60% Muslim), wrong culture.

I don’t quite agree with that. For example, it maintains that women should not vote or otherwise be involved in politics. Likewise, it forbids women as clergy. (The vote and clergy prohibitions are very wise IMO.) Even the Saudi prohibition against women driving cuts down considerably on their women being adulterous, going out and spending money without at least a chance of husband/father oversight, etc., so at the least has silver linings. So, I think your position is a bit untenable.

Think whatever you like, but you’re wrong. Cancer has no redeeming qualities for its victim. Islam has no female clergy? Big deal: their male clergy are actively trying to lead everyone to hell in service to their false demon-god and his pedophile “prophet” – so its not like female imams, muftis, or ayatollahs would be any worse. Also, there is nothing in Islamic Law about women not voting, so that’s a red herring – in countries that allow women to vote, Muslim women do so, since it is not against their religion. The prohibition against women driving in Saudi Arabia is also not found within Islam: not only do other Muslim countries allow women to drive, but Muslim women drive in countries that do not have that law. You are confusing the secular laws in a small number of Muslim-majority countries with Islamic Law. They are two entirely different things.

Ok, then, Lyn, what if anything does Islam specifically say about female clergy?

And, no, it’s not impossible that female mullahs would be even worse than the men. Arabs may run a bit lower IQ on average than Westerners, but the pushing towards the mediocre mean universal in women would apply there, too, nearly excluding the chance of any brilliant women clergy, and no average/dull mullah is going to reform Islam.

As you probably know, the Tempes brothers grew up as “royal hostages” in the same household as Mehmed II. (Dracula wasn’t the family name – it is a diminutive of the word Dracul: since their father was a member of “The Order of the Dragon”). Being a typical Muslim male, Mehmed was bisexual, and seems to have “converted” Radu Tempes to the same lifestyle. Vlad rejected his advances, but it’s likely that he was raped in his years at the Ottoman court, which, as has been noted, is something Muslims are very fond of doing to young boys. (Ah… there’s that male privilege again…)

Vlad biographer Raymond McNally posits that it might have been those rapes that drove him to frequently impale Muslims when they fell into his hands. Being the victim of Muslim “sexual impaling,” when he was in position to deal with Muslim prisoners of war, he had thousands of them impaled on stakes in retribution. Since Muslims are so fond of “impaling” boys like him when he was in their power, he let them die by their own sick, disgusting methods.

Save me your racist crap: I’m a half-breed and my I.Q. has been measured at around four StDevs to the right of the mean. Based on the odds: if we knew each other in person it’s a near-certainty that I would be the smartest person you know… and quite possibly the smartest person you’ve ever known. Your idea that the differences in male and female I.Q. curves essentially precludes smart women from gaining influence (if such were permitted) is just you showing that you’re bad at math. We can agree that women should not become Christian clergy members, but it is not true that there are so few smart women that their numbers are mathematically insignificant.

But you’re missing the point anyway – every single thing about Muslim theology is wrong, and Islam is a road-map to hell. Whether the person handing you a map to hell is a man or a woman is utterly irrelevant. You can’t improve Islam. You can’t reform Islam. The only good thing you can do is destroy it… utterly.

If you think that “smart” Muslim clergy are going to “fix” or “reform” what’s wrong with Islam (or that Islam is even capable of being fixed or reformed), you don’t know enough about it to form an opinion (as evidenced by the fact that you thought that the occasional prohibitions against female voting and driving are part of Islamic Law).

“I had a beautiful jeweled bag that came form Israel and had “Israel” jeweled on it – my mother wouldn’t let me go outside with it – it had to stay inside of the house because they were so afraid of muslim men seeing me wearing it.”

“Anyone who thinks Sharia law would be an improvement over what we have now it nuts.”

They’re ignorant little boys (regardless of age) in whose fantasies Sharia results in a harem for every man. In reality, Sharia results in harems for older, wealthier alphas, and zilch for the majority of men further down the social ladder. It’s not as though a culture can magically produce four baby girls for every baby boy. And most Muslim countries have significantly more men than women.

Countries in blue have more men than women. Red have more women than men.

That is one reason Allah “commanded” Mohammed to raid neighboring countries and capture slaves. Mohammed had to keep his warriors supplied with wives and concubines, and they couldn’t accomplish that locally, so they raided and slaved in Asia, Africa and Europe for centuries.

They can’t do that anymore, and that leaves hordes of men with no means with which to acquire a family, and therefore no means to acquire wasta.

“seriously my parents were racist, so it’s hard for me to separate that part of myself when viewing arabs/muslims.”

What I just wrote reminded me of that statement. It’s not about “race”, it’s about culture. As Lyn and I (the resident Beaners) keep emphasizing, culture is far more important than “race”, and this example really highlights that truth.

There are many Christian Arabs (though their numbers are dwindling), and they are vastly different from Muslim Arabs, despite being of the same “race” (whatever that means).

I’m not sure why I bother with this, but here goes anyway, on the off chance that you might be an adult with normal cognitive abilities.

I take it you’re new here, otherwise you would know that Luke routinely makes all sorts of blatantly racist comments. One of his favorite themes is that – for all practical purposes – only white men have any brains, despite the fact that at least two of us here are Hispanic and both of us are a good deal smarter than he is. You are smart enough to see why I made my point the way I did, aren’t you?

Sigh. Would someone (typing very slowly so he can follow) please define for Lyn the words “median”, “average”, “central tendency”, and such? For anyone who thinks all races have just as many geniuses proportionate to their total numbers, please take a look at the names of science Nobel Prize winners. (Hint: are >90% white, and at least 20% Jewish.) Next, look at Dept. of Justice statistics for who commits the most crime, or Census data on illegitimacy rates. Boy, the latter two sure prove his position that everyone’s all the same, but for ” ‘scrimination”.

I don’t need to take me time, since of the two of us I appear to be the one who understands it implicitly. Of course a population with an I.Q. curve with the mean at 105 will have more geniuses and fewer simpletons than a population whose curve has a mean of 95. Nobody is suggesting otherwise. What is often suggested (including as recently as yesterday on this website by HR), is that those kinds of differences mean that nobody in the demographic group represented by the second curve could be exceptional enough to be effective… That’s just bad math. Do you get it yet?

Speaking of math, Lyn, please tell us how many Fields Medal winners you would expect to be, say, black, out of the ~56 there have been. (It’s the closest equivalent of the Nobel Prize for mathematics.)

Actually, I’ve been reading this blog for about a year. About as long as you have I believe and long enough to witness several of your “Racism” tantrums. As to my age, I’m old enough to know that a USMA grad who retires as a light Colonel doesn’t impress me that much, however smart he may think he is.

I see you have thrown another racism snit fit on another of Dalrock’s threads. You are a busy boy. Why don’t you just give the racism name calling thing a rest.